Basic recommendations for earthquake protection_16 docx

BIBLIOGRAPHY 399
Spence, R.J.S. and Coburn, A.W., 1984. ‘Traditional housing in seismic areas’, in The
International Karakoram Project (ed. K.J. Miller), Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Spence, R.J.S. and Coburn, A.W., 1987a. Reducing Earthquake Losses in Rural Areas,
Final Report of Project R3662, Vulnerability of Low-Income Houses in Earthquake
Areas, to Overseas Development Administration, HM Government, UK, The Martin
Centre for Architectural and Urban Studies, University of Cambridge.
Spence, R. and Coburn, A.W., 1987b. ‘Earthquake protection – an international task for
the 1990’s’, The Structural Engineer , 65A, (8), August.
Spence, R. and Coburn, A.W., 1992. ‘Strengthening buildings of stone masonry to resist
earthquakes’, Meccanica, 26,(3),September.
Spence, R., Coburn, A. and Dudley, E., 1989. Gypsum Plaster: its manufacture and use,
Intermediate Technology Publications, London.
Spence, R., Coburn, A.W., Pomonis, A. and Sakai, S., 1992a. ‘Correlation of ground
motion with building damage: the definition of a new damage-based seismic intensity
scale’, Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,Madrid.
Spence, R.J.S., Coburn, A.W., Sakai, S. and Pomonis, A., 1991a. ‘A parameterless scale
of seismic intensity for use in seismic risk analysis and vulnerability assessment’, in
SECED (ed.) Earthquake, Blast and Impact: Measurement and Effects of Vibration,
Elsevier Applied Science, Amsterdam.
Spence, R.J.S., Coburn, A.W., Sakai, S. and Pomonis, A., 1991b. Reducing Human Casu-
alties in Building Collapse: First Report , The Martin Centre, Department of Architec-
ture, Cambridge University.
Spence, R.J.S., Coburn, A.W., Sakai, S. and Pomonis, A., 1992b. Reducing Human Casu-
alties in Building Collapse: Methods of Optimising Disaster Plans to Reduce Injury
Levels, Project Final Report, Science and Engineering Research Council, The Martin
Centre for Architectural and Urban Studies, University of Cambridge.
Spence, R.J.S. and Cook, D., 1983. Building Materials in Developing Countries, John
Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Spence, R. and D’Ayala, D., 1999. ‘Damage assessment and analysis of the 1997 Umbria-

Marche earthquakes’, Structural Engineering International, March, 229–233, Zurich.
Spence, R., D’Ayala, D., Oliveira, C. and Pomonis, A., 2000. ‘The performance of
strengthened masonry buildings in recent European earthquakes’, 12th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper 1366, Auckland.
Spence, R., del Re, D. and Thompson, A., 2002a. ‘Performance of buildings’, Chapter 3
in The Bhuj Earthquake of 26.1.01: A Field Report by EEFIT (ed. G. Madabhushi),
Institution of Structural Engineers, London.
Spence, R., Peterken, O., Booth, E., Aydinoglu, N., Bommer, J. and Tabuchi, S., 2002b.
‘Seismic loss estimation for Turkish catastrophe insurance, Proceedings 7th US
National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper 722.
Spence, R., Pomonis, A., Dowrick, D.J. and Cousins, J.A., 1998. ‘Assessment of casual-
ties in urban earthquakes’, in Seismic Design Practice into the Next Century (ed. E.
Booth), Balkema, Rotterdam.
Starr, C., 1969. ‘Social benefit versus technological risk: what is our society willing to
pay for safety?’, Science, 165, 1232–1236.
Steinbrugge, K.V., 1982. Earthquakes, Volcanoes and Tsunamis: An Anatomy of Hazards,
Skandia America Group, 280 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA.
Steinbrugge, K.V., Algermissen, S.T. and Lagorio, H.J., 1984. ‘Determining monetary
losses and casualties for use in earthquake mitigation and disaster planning’, Eighth
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, Vol. 7, 615–623.
Stephens, L.H. and Green, S.J., 1979. Disaster Assistance: Appraisal, Reform and New
Approaches, New York University Press, New York.
400 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Swiss Re, 2000. ‘Natural catastrophes and manmade disasters in 2000’, Sigma,No.2
(annual series available from www.swissre.com/portal).
Tanabashi, R., 1960. ‘Earthquake resistance of traditional Japanese wooden structure’,
Second World Conference on Earthquake Engineering , Tokyo, 151–163.
Tanaka, H. and Baxter, P., 2001. Personal communication.
Thompson, P., Cuny, C., Coburn, A.W., Cheretis, J. and Georgoussis, G., 1986. Earth-
quake Damage Assessment and Recovery Issues in Kalamata Region, Peloponnese,

Greece, Report prepared by INTERTECT, Dallas, USA, in collaboration with The
Earthquake Planning and Protection Organisation (OASP), Athens, and The Ministry
of Environment, Planning and Public Works, Greece, for the Office of US Foreign
Disaster Assistance, Agency for International Development, Washington, DC 20523,
USA.
Tiedemann, H., 1982. ‘Structural and non-structural damage related to building quality’,
Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Earthquake Engineering,Athens,
Vol. 6, 27.
Tiedemann, H., 1984. ‘A model for the assessment of seismic risk’, Proceedings of the
Eighth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, Vol. 1, 199.
Tiedemann, H., 1984a. ‘Economic consequences of earthquakes’, International Sympo-
sium on Earthquake Risk in Less Industrialized Areas, Zurich, 63–68.
Tiedemann, H., 1986. ‘Insurance and the mitigation of earthquake disasters’, UNDRO
News, Jan/Feb issue.
Tiedemann, H., 1989. ‘Casualties as a Function of Building Quality and Earthquake Inten-
sity’, International Workshop on Earthquake Injury Epidemiology, The John Hopkins
University, July 1989, pp. 420–434.
Tiedemann, H., 1992. Earthquakes and Volcanic Eruption: A Handbook on Risk Assess-
ment, Swiss Reinsurance Company, Mythenquai 50/60, PO Box, CH-8022, Zurich,
Switzerland.
Tobriner, S., 1982. The Genesis of Noto – An Eighteenth Century Sicilian City,A.Zwem-
mer, London.
Tobriner, S., 1984. ‘A history of reinforced masonry construction designed to resist earth-
quakes 1755–1907’, Earthquake Spectra, 1, (1), 125–150.
Toro, G., Abrahamson, N. and Schneider, J., 1997. ‘Model of strong ground motion from
earthquakes in central and eastern North America’, Seismological Research Letters ,
68, 41–57.
Toro, G.R. and McGuire, R.K., 1987. ‘An investigation into earthquake ground motion
characteristics in Eastern North America’, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, 77, (2), 468–489.

UN, 1970. Skopje Resurgent, United Nations, New York.
UN, 1975. Low-Cost Construction Resistant to Earthquake and Hurricanes, United
Nations Sales No. E75 IV7, New York.
UN, 1988. Resolution 42/169 of the General Assembly of United Nations, 11 December.
UNCHS, 1989, Human Settlements and Natural Disasters, United Nations Centre for
Human Settlements (Habitat), PO Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya.
UNCHS, 1990. Small-scale Manufacture of Low-Cost Building Materials, United Nations
Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat), PO Box 30030, Nairobi, Kenya.
UNCHS, 2001. Cities in a Globalizing World: Global Report on Human Settlements,Earth-
scan, London.
UNDP, 1991. Disaster Mitigation, UNDP/UNDRO Disaster Management Training Pro-
gramme.
UNDRO, 1979. Natural Disasters and Vulnerability Analysis: Report of Expert Group
Meeting, Office of United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator (UNDRO), Palais des
Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 401
UNDRO, 1982. Shelter After Disaster, Office of United Nations Disaster Relief Coordi-
nator (UNDRO), Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland.
UNDRO, 1984. Disaster Prevention and Mitigation: A Compendium of Current Knowl-
edge, 12 vols, Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator (UNDRO),
Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland.
UNDRO, 1989, Natural Disasters and Insurance, Proceedings of the 1st Meeting of the
International Working Group sponsored by UNDRO in collaboration with UNESCO
and The Geneva Association, Office of United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator
(UNDRO), Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland.
UNESCO, 1982. Earthquake Risk Reduction in the Balkan Region, Final Report, 5 vols,
UNESCO in association with UNDRO, Project Number RER/79/014, United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 7, place de Fontenoy,
75700 Paris, France.
UNHCR, 1999. Handbook for Emergencies, United Nations High Commissioner for

Refugees, Geneva.
UNICEF, 1986. Assisting in Emergencies: A Resource Handbook for UNICEF Field Staff,
Prepared by Ron Ockwell, United Nations Children’s Fund, May.
UNIDO, 1984. Building Construction under Seismic Conditions in the Balkan Region,
7 vols, prepared by UNIDO in collaboration with UNDP, Project Number RER/79/015,
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Vienna International
Centre, PO Box 300, A-1400 Vienna, Austria.
USACE, 1999. Urban Search and Rescue Structures Specialist: Field Operation Guide,
US Army Corps of Engineers Readiness Support Center, San Francisco.
USGS, 2002. US Design Hazard Maps for use with the Uniform Building Code (http://geo-
hazards.cr.usgs.gov/eq/design/ibc/IBC1615-lus.pdf).
Vaciago, G., 1989. ‘Seismic microzonation as a practical urban planning tool’,MSc
Dissertation, Imperial College.
Ville de Goyet, C., 1976. ‘Earthquake in Guatemala, epidemiologic evaluation of the relief
effort’, Bulletin Pan American Health Organisation, 10, (2), 95–109.
Ville de Goyet, C., 2000. ‘Stop propagating disaster myths’, The Lancet , 356, 762–764.
Warburton, G., 1991. The Reduction of Vibrations, The Mallet-Milne Lecture, SECED,
Institution of Civil Engineers, London.
Warner, J., 1984. ‘Important aspects of cementitious materials used in repair and retrofit’,
Eighth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, Vol. 1, 493–499.
West, W.D., 1935. ‘Preliminary geological report on the Baluchistan (Quetta) earthquake
of May 31’, Records of the Geological Survey of India,Vol.LXI.
Watabe, M., Mochizuki, K.T., Takahashi, T. and Hase, T., 1991. ‘Microzonation on seis-
mic intensity in Tokyo’, Proceedings, Fourth International Conference on Seismic
Zonation, Vol. 1, 691–701.
Westgate, K., 1981. ‘Land-use planning, vulnerability and the low-income dwelling’, in
Disasters and the Small Dwelling (ed. I. Davis), Pergamon Press, London.
Whitman, R.V., Biggs, J.M., Brennan, J.E., III, Cornell, C.A., De Neufville, R.L. and
Vanmarcke, E.H., 1975. ‘Seismic design decision analysis’, Journal of the Structural
Division, ST5 ASCE, 1067–1084.

Whitman, R.V., Heger, F.J., Luft, R.W. and Krimgold, F., 1980. ‘Seismic resistance of
existing buildings’, Journal of the Structural Division, ST7 ASCE 1573–1591.
Whitman, R.V., Reed, J.W. and Hong, S.T., 1973. ‘Earthquake probability matrices’, Pro-
ceedings of the Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1, 2531.
Wiegel, R.L., 1970. Earthquake Engineering , Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff, NJ.
Wiggins, J.H. and Moran, C., 1970. Earthquake Safety in the City of Long Beach Based
on the Concept of Balanced Risk , J.H. Wiggins Co., Redondo Beach, CA.
402 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Winchester, P., 1992. Power, Choice and Vulnerability: A Case Study in Disaster Mis-
management in South India, James and James Science Publishers, London.
Wolfe, M.R., Bolton, P.A., Heikkala, S.G., Greene, M.M. and May, P.J., 1986. Land
Use Planning for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation: A Handbook for Planners, Special
Publ. 14, Natural Hazards and Application Information Center, Institute of Behavioral
Science #3, Campus Box 482, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0482, USA.
Wong, K.M., 1987. Seismic Strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings,Centrefor
Environmental Design Research, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Woo, G., 1999. The Mathematics of Natural Catastrophes, Imperial College Press, London.
Wu Liang Yong, 1981. ‘Reconstruction after the Tangshan earthquake’, Seminar in Depart-
ment of Architecture, Cambridge University, 4 March.
Yanev, P., 1974. Peace of Mind in Earthquake Country: How to Save Your Home and Life,
Chronicle Books, San Francisco.
Zhang Quinnan, 1987. ‘Urban earthquake disaster mitigation planning and information in
China’, International Research and Training Seminar on Regional Development Plan-
ning for Disaster Prevention, United Nations Centre for Regional Development, Tokyo.
Zuccaro, G. 1998. ‘Seismic vulnerability of Vesuvian villages: structural distributions
and a possible scenario’, in Reducing Earthquake Risk to Structures and Monuments
in the EU, Conference Proceedings (ed. R. Spence), EU Environment and Climate
Programme.
Index
Note: Figures and Tables are indicated by italic page numbers, footnotes by

suffix “n[X]” where “X” is the note number (e.g. “32n[21]” is note 21 at the
foot of page 32)
Acapulco (Mexico), risk category 12
accelerated reconstruction
assistance for 160–1
disadvantages 225
acceleration 267n[3]
see also peak ground acceleration
acceleration spectrum, effect of soil
conditions 254
acceptable risk 367–9
lowest level considered 368–9
active control systems 279
adobe (earthen brick) masonry 264
strengthening of 294
vulnerability functions 329, 330
aerial reconnaissance, after earthquake
99, 100
afghanistan
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 7, 13
aftershocks 137–8
danger to rescuers 112, 138
Agadir earthquake (Morocco, 1960) 7
agencies, coordination in emergency
92–4
agriculture
losses 143, 145–6
recovery of 145–6
Ahmedabad Study and Action Group

(ASAG), building programme 360
alarm systems 80
Alaska earthquake (USA, 1964) 236nn
[3&5]
Albania
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Algeria
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 13
alternative risk transfer 63–4
Ancash earthquake (Peru, 1970) 7,
126–7
animal behaviour, earthquake prediction
based on 77
anisotropy of rocks, as prediction indicator
76
Argentina
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 13
Armenia earthquake (former USSR, 1988)
7, 32n[21], 67, 105n[13], 153, 339
Ashkhabad earthquake (former USSR,
1948) 7, 117n[28]
Assisi (Italy)
Basilica of St Francis 149n[6], 305,
305, 306
strengthening of buildings 308
Athens earthquake (Greece, 1999) 67
attenuation relationships 246–8

Australia, fatalities 6
average return periods, estimation of 73
Avezzano earthquake (Italy, 1915) 7
awareness programmes 87 –8, 189
Azerbaijan, fatalities 6
404 INDEX
background noise
effect on survivor audibility 110,
111
reduction of 111
Bangladesh, fatalities 5
base-isolation techniques 278, 303
beams and columns, stiffness 276
Beijing (China), risk category 12
Belgium
fatalities 6
see also Li
´
ege
Belice earthquake (Sicily, Italy) 22
Bhopal disaster (India, 1984) 126
Bing
¨
ol earthquake (Turkey, 1971) 154,
245
blood supplies and transfusion centres
122
body seismic waves 17
Bogota (Colombia), risk category 12
Bolivia, fatalities 5

Bolu (Turkey), strengthening of buildings
300, 301
Boston (USA)
cost per life saved 372
death risk probability 369
vulnerability comparison 371
braced frames 273, 274
Brazil, fatalities 6
brick masonry buildings
damage distributions 327, 328
vulnerability functions 328, 329,
330
Bucharest earthquake (Romania, 1977)
67, 237n[6]
budgeting for losses and mitigation
220–2
builder training 228–30, 293, 294–5,
360–1, 363
building certification 209
building codes
consultation about 214
earthquake protection provisions
172, 174, 185, 282, 354 –5
education/training about 214–15
emergency 155
enforcement of 205–6
review of 214
strictness 213–14
see also International Building Code
building collapse see collapse of buildings

building construction techniques, and
self-protection measures 31–2, 172
building control 355–7
recommended new provisions in
Turkey 356
building improvement grants 208
building improvement programmes
226–30
builder training off-site 228–30
communal building programmes
227–8
incentive programmes 227
reasons for failure 285
technical assistance on-site 228
building materials, for reconstruction
161, 164–5
building response to earthquakes 267–71
Building for Safety project 293, 359
building stock data 194
building stock management 206–10
and land-use planning 193
building types 263–7
and vulnerability assessment
318–19
vulnerability classification 264–5
buildings
alterations to existing 277
improving earthquake resistance of
263–309
natural frequency 197, 237, 269

natural period 197, 269, 271
separation between 277
ways of resisting earthquakes
272–4
Bulgaria, fatalities 5
Burma
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Bursa (Turkey)
1970 earthquake 237n[6]
1885 earthquake 170
reconstruction after 169–70
planning of new suburbs 170, 196
businesses
losses by 46–7, 57–8
see also corporate businesses
buttressing 300, 302
Buyin Zhara earthquake (Iran, 1962) 7
Campania earthquake (Italy, 1980) 67,
99, 105n[13], 163, 236n[2]
Canada, fatalities 5
canine search 111
INDEX 405
capital infusion model of reconstruction
156, 157
capital markets, effects on 44, 52, 53
Caracas earthquake (Venezuela, 1967)
237n[6]
casualties 3–7
estimation of 338–42

M-parameters used 339–41
see also fatalities
casualty assessment 119–20
catalogue compilation 238–42
catastrophe bond 64
catastrophe losses 61–4
catastrophe models 63
catastrophe perils (insurance) 59
catastrophe reinsurance 60–1
cellular phone networks 96, 191
cement–lime–sand mortar 291
central business districts, recovery of
148–9
characteristic earthquakes 73–4
chemical monitoring, in prediction
technique 77
Chernobyl disaster (former USSR, 1986)
126
Chiba (Japan), risk category 12
Chichi earthquake (Taiwan, 1999) 67
Chile
1985 earthquake 237n[7]
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Chillan; Valparaiso
Chillan earthquake (Chile, 1939) 7
China
death risk probability 368
economic growth 63
economic losses 13

fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Beijing; Haicheng –Yingkou;
Kansu; Shanxi; Tangshan; Tianjin;
Tsinghai; Xi’an; Yunnan
cities
decentralisation of 200
deconcentration of 198, 200
limiting densities in new settlements
199–200
reconstruction of 152–6
(re)design of 153, 167, 168, 170
reducing densities in 198–9
see also urban
clients, persuading of need for protection
223
coastal earthquakes 78, 128
codes of practice
for engineered buildings 281–5
improving 354–5
in Quetta (Pakistan) 172, 355
collapse of buildings
fatalities due to 8–10, 338
making safe after 135–7
speed of rescue 103–4
survival times of trapped victims
101–3
collateral hazards 123–8, 235–6, 343–6
Colombia
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 5, 13

see also Bogota; Papayan; Quindio
commercial premises 148 –9
emergency function 203
role in recovery 149, 203
communal building programmes 227–8
communications systems
business use 190–1
in emergency 96–7, 204
for evacuation warnings 80
role in recovery 204
community construction projects 182
community consultation, for
reconstruction 225
community groups 180–3
community-initiated projects 182–3,
227–8
compression seismic waves 17
compulsory earthquake insurance 215,
261, 356–7
computer mapping, for emergency
management 97, 98
concrete block masonry, vulnerability
functions 329, 330
conflagrations 124
congregation points 81
construction control 213–17
construction industry
and reconstruction 162–5
training in earthquake resistant
techniques 218, 228–30

construction standards, improving 353–8
consumer confidence, effects on 43–4
consumer demand, as means of upgrading
buildings 208–9
cooking facilities 133
core houses, in incremental reconstruction
161–2
406 INDEX
Corinth earthquake (Greece, 1981/1982)
82, 298, 339
corporate businesses
emergency planning by 189–90,
192
hazardous facilities/plants 185
information protection 191–2
insurance cover 58
losses by 47, 53, 57–8
non-structural hazards 187–9
protection objectives 185–7
recovery of 147
self-sufficiency 190–1
structural safety of buildings 183–5
see also insurance companies
corporate risk management 183–92
cost–benefit analysis
alternative protection strategies
evaluated using 364–5
protection objectives prioritised using
186
cost-effectiveness criterion 365–7

cost per saved life 366
in strengthening of buildings 371,
372
Costa Rica
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
costs of earthquakes 13, 37–69
annual loss rate 37
loss per fatality 13
reason for need for data 41–2
San Francisco example 37–8
types of loss costs 39
creep freeze 74
CRESTA 259
zonation maps 260–1
Croatia, fatalities 6
cross-bracing, reinforced buildings
strengthened by 173, 273, 302–3
crush injuries 118
crush syndrome 114
Cuba, fatalities 6
cultural effects (of earthquake) 42–3
cumulative distribution function
326n[15]
Cyprus, fatalities 5
Czechoslovakia (former), fatalities 6
damage–attenuation relationships 346
damage distribution 322–3
brick masonry buildings 327
in HAZUS 336–7

damage estimation/evaluation 97–8,
99–101
and vulnerability assessment
319–22
damage grades/levels (D0 to D5) 25,
28–30, 322
probability distributions 324
damage probability matrix (DPM) 322–3
example 323
non-structural loss included 345
damage states 321–2
in HAZUS methodology 334, 335
damaged settlements
reconstruction of 151, 160–1
relocation of 153–5, 175
damping devices 279, 303
dams, failure of 126, 344
Dasht-e-Bayaz earthquake (Iran, 1968)
7, 31n[13]
databases, for emergency management
98
dead bodies, dealing with 116
death risk probability 368–9
various causes listed 368
deaths see fatalities
debris flows 126–7, 236
deconcentration of cities and services
175, 198–200
demolition of collapsed buildings
116–17, 136

de-sensationalising 87
design loads, geographical distribution of
251–3
design professionals
education and training of 217–18
supporting 222–3
destroyed settlements, reconstruction of
151–2
developing countries, priorities for 380
development incentives 208
development projects, earthquake
protection in 231
Dhamar earthquake (Yemen, 1982) 9,
32n[21], 117n[27], 229, 285, 361
diaphragms (floor or roof), effect on
vulnerability 273, 329, 330
disaster management 92, 94
disaster mitigation measures 215, 217
disaster mitigation skills 231–2
INDEX 407
disaster plans 94
for community groups 181
national 212
testing 95
disaster relief 224–5
do-nothing-until-it-happens approach
375–6
dollar loss, meaning of term 39
Dominican Republic, fatalities 5
doors, jamming of 278

dressed stone masonry, vulnerability
functions 329, 330
ductility 279
duration of earthquake 268
earthquake belts 14
earthquake catalogues
compilation of 238–42
historical data 239–40
instrumental catalogues 239
earthquake drills 88, 180
earthquake engineering 220
earthquake engineering research 357–8
earthquake insurance 56–7, 58, 180, 376
compulsory 215, 261, 356–7
earthquake prediction 16, 71–8
earthquake preparedness planning 88–9
earthquake protection
fundraising for 222
meaning of term 26
prioritisation of 186, 205
and reconstruction 165–75
earthquake protection strategies 177–232
and decision making 379–80
evaluating alternative strategies
364–9
examples 369–75
social and public policy aspects
375–80
earthquake resistance of buildings
improving 263–309

and structural form 274–9
earthquake risk, meaning of term
313–14, 314n[3]
earthquake risk mitigation, meaning of
term 26
earthquake risk modelling 311–52
earthquake waves 17
attenuation of 17
earthquakes
causes 16, 18
geographical distribution 14–16
economic damage, repairing 144–9
economic development
and disaster mitigation measures
215, 217
effects on 43
economic development zones (EDZs)
147, 152
economic loss
countries compared 13
effect on national finances 65–6
funding implications 65
as percentage of GNP 67
estimating 41, 345–6
meaning of term 39
reason for need for data 41–2
Ecuador
builder training project 360–1
1987 earthquakes 360
economic losses 13

fatalities 4, 13
rammed earth building construction
361, 362
education and training
design professionals 217–18
see also training
Egypt, fatalities 5
El Asnam (Algeria, 1980) 339
El Salvador
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 5, 13
elastic rebound, energy release by 16
electrical networks
emergency function 204
role in recovery 204
emergency building codes 155
emergency management 91–101
emergency operations 91–138
funding of 64–5
organisations involved in 93
emergency planning 92, 94
for businesses 189
emergency preparedness 84–9, 181
emergency shelters 130–2, 157, 158
employee training 189–90
energy absorbers 279
engineered buildings
codes of practice 281–5
philosophy 281–3
typical requirements 283–5

structural types 265
408 INDEX
engineering techniques, for
earthquake-resistance improvement
278–9
engineers
education and training of 214–15,
218
supporting 222
epicentral intensity 240
epicentre maps, example 241
EQSIM software tool 97n[5]
Erzincan earthquake (Turkey, 1939) 7,
245
Erzurum earthquake (Turkey, 1983)
117n[27], 132, 245
escape routes, in commercial/industrial
premises 189
Ethiopia, fatalities 5
Eurocode (EC8) for design of structures
for earthquake resistance 251, 282
European Community Humanitarian
Office (ECHO) 49
European Macroseismic Scale (EMS)
22–6
damage classification (D1 to D5)
25, 28–30, 322
intensity scale 22–4
relationship to PSI scale 328
vulnerability classes 26

European seismic hazard map, 250-1,
Plate II
evacuation 80–1, 128
pros and cons 82–3
temporary 129–30
time needed from multi-storey
buildings 81
excavation (in collapsed buildings) 1,
112
exceedance probability (EP) curves 312
existing buildings, strengthening of
293–304, 358–9
exportation of earthquake mitigation
measures 174
‘fade-away’ time (of trapped survivors)
102, 103, 340
failsafe structures 186
false alarms, effect of 79, 82
familiarisation 87
fatalities 3–7
causes 7–10, 338
numbers 4–7 , 10–11, 13, 119, 339
relationship to number of buildings
damaged 338, 339
risk probabilities 368
fault breaks 234
fault creep 74
fault mechanisms 17
field camps 134, 158
see also temporary relief camps

field hospitals 115, 122
Fiji, fatalities 6
financial penalties, to encourage upgrading
of buildings 209
fire brigades 125
fire following earthquake 124–6
fatalities due to 8
loss/risk prediction 344–5
ways of minimising 125, 179, 188,
200
fire sources, protection of 179, 188
fire station 125, 202, 204
fires, as cause of fatalities 8, 8,11
flooding hazards 236, 344
follow-on disasters 123–8, 235–6
as cause of fatalities 8, 338
risks due to 343–6
food supplies
emergency 133
losses 146
foreshock activity, as indicator of big
earthquake 75–6, 138n[52]
foundations 278
fragile items, protection of 188
fragility curves 323, 333, 337
France, fatalities 5
frequency characteristics
of buildings 197, 269
of soils 197
frequency of motion 268

Friuli earthquake (Italy, 1976) 149, 150,
297, 339, 351n[42], 358
fuel
reserves for businesses 190
in temporary relief camps 133
functionally protected structures 186
furniture, large/heavy 179, 187
future challenges 383–4
garden walls, collapse of 179
gas networks 204
geodetic surveys 72
geographical distribution of earthquakes,
14-16, Plate I
INDEX 409
geographical information systems (GIS)
97, 98
geological studies 72
Ghana, fatalities 6
glass fixtures 188, 189
global positioning systems (GPS),
geodetic surveys using 72
Global Seismic Hazard Assessment
Project (GSHAP) 249–51
global seismic hazard map, 14, Plate I
249
government, losses by 48, 53, 64–6
Great Kanto earthquake (Tokyo, Japan,
1923) 7, 124, 257
Greece
economic losses 13, 67

fatalities 4, 13
relative seismic rates 316
see also Athens; Corinth; Kalamata
grid networks 204–5
ground acceleration, units 267n[4]
ground deformation, as prediction
indicator 76
ground failure 126–7, 235 –6, 343–4
ground motion 267–9
amplification 195, 237
and microzoning 255–7
site conditions affecting 17, 237,
253
building response to 269–71
hazard estimating 238–53
maps 250, 253
PSI scale 325–33
Guatemala
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
subsidised construction materials
programme 362 –3
Guatemala City
1976 earthquake 7, 67, 127, 362
risk category 12
Guinea, fatalities 5
Gujarat earthquake (India, 2001) 43,
96n[4], 106n[14], 131, 285, 286, 333
Gutenberg linear regression relationship
349n[38]

Gutenberg–Richter relationship 242
applied to magnitude–recurrence plot
241
Haicheng–Yingkou earthquake (China,
1975) 77, 82, 83
Haiti, fatalities 6
hazard, meaning of term 314–15
hazard assessment, uncertainties in
349–50
hazard research 219
hazardous facilities/plants 126, 185
HAZUS loss estimation methodology
333–7
advantages 334
building type classification for 319,
321, 333
capacity curves 335, 336
damage distribution 336–7
damage states 334, 335
demand curves 336
fragility curves 337
non-structural losses 345
performance point defined 334, 335
head injuries 117, 117
fade-away times for trapped victims
103
heritage, effects of earthquake 42–3
historical background 1
seismic intensity scales 27
self-protection measures 32

historical buildings
damage to/destruction of 42–3,
149n[6], 306
protection of 210–11
repair and strengthening of 149,
150, 304–9
historical earthquakes
data/studies 73, 239–40
value-adjusted losses 37–8, 39
historical loss, meaning of term 39
historical monuments, restoration of
304–5
historical urban centres
repair and strengthening of 149,
150, 305–9
evaluating alternative strategies
373, 375
home safety 178–9
homeowner insurance 56–7
homeowners, losses by 45, 53, 54–7
Honduras, fatalities 6
horticultural losses 146
hospital capacities 121–2
hospital emergency plans 121
human casualty estimation 338–42
Hungary, fatalities 6
Hurricane Andrew (USA, 1992) 61, 63
410 INDEX
Iceland, fatalities 6
incentive programmes (for building

improvement) 227
incremental reconstruction 161–2
India
economic growth 63
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 7, 13
reconstruction building programme
360
see also Bhopal; Gujarat; Kangra
Indonesia
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 7
industrial facilities/plants
emergency function 203
hazardous 126, 185
role in recovery 203
industrial hazards 126
industry
losses 47, 143
recovery of 146–7
inertia forces 269, 272
infill panels 276–7, 291
informal settlements 125, 200, 211
information dissemination 84–6, 181
information management, in emergency
response 97–8
information protection, for businesses
191–2
infrastructure
damage to 48, 64

losses 143
reconstruction of 153
injured survivors
on-site medical attention 114
transportation of 115
types of injury requiring treatment
117–18
in-plane forces, effects 273
instantaneous warning 78
instrumental catalogues 239
instrumental ground-motion parameters,
relationship with PSI scale 331
insurance
by companies 58
by homeowners 56–7, 180
compulsory 215, 261, 356–7
insurance companies 58–9
losses due to earthquakes 50, 53,
60–4
insurance markets 59, 60
insurance risk mapping 259–61
insured loss, meaning of term 39
intangible losses 42–4
effects on consumer and investor
confidence 43–4
effects on culture and heritage 42–3
effects on long-term economic
development 43
integrated building materials plan 164–5
integrated earthquake hazard studies

72–3
integrated earthquake protection plan
212
intensity–attenuation relationships 247,
248
intensity of earthquakes 18, 21
mapping of 21–2
scales 22–6
historical development of 27
international aid 223–4
international aid and development
organisations 224–32
costs of Kocaeli earthquake (Turkey,
1999) 49, 53
International Association for Earthquake
Engineering (IAEE), on design codes
354
International Association for Seismology
and Physics of the Earth’s Interior
(IASPEI), guidelines on precursory
phenomena 77
international Building Code 249, 253,
282
International Search and Rescue Advisory
Group (INSARAG), guidelines 105,
109n[17]
international search and rescue assistance
104–6
interrelated risks 53, 67–8
intra-plate earthquakes 15–16, 18

investor confidence, effects on 43–4
iran
building construction techniques
31nn[12-13]
death risk probability 368
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Buyin Zhara; Dasht-e-Bayaz;
Kermanshah; Manjil; Shiraz;
Tabas; Tehran
Iraq, fatalities 6
INDEX 411
Irpinia earthquake (Italy, 1980) 135,
158, 297, 358
island arcs 14
isoseismal maps 21–2
Istanbul earthquake (Turkey, 1999)
237n[6]
Italy
death risk probability 369
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
seismic maps 241, 243
see also Assisi; Avezzano: Belice;
Campania, Friuli; Irpinia;
Lucca–Modena; Messina; Naples;
Noto; Umbria–Marche
Izmir (Turkey), risk category 12
Izmit (Turkey), risk category 12
jacketing

masonry buildings 298, 308
reinforced concrete buildings
300–1, 303
jacking equipment 113, 114
Jamaica
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Japan
CRESTA zonation map 260
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
relative seismic rates 316
see also Chiba; Kanto; Kawasaki;
Kobe; Sapporo; Sendai; Tokyo;
Yokohama
Japanese Meteorological Agency (JMA)
intensity scale 26, 27
Japanese Railways, earthquake shock
warning system 78
Jordan, fatalities 5
Kalamata earthquake (Greece, 1986) 67,
102, 146n[4], 339
Kangra earthquake (India, 1905) 7
Kansu earthquake (China, 1920) 7
Kanto earthquake (Japan, 1923) 7, 124,
257, 275n[8]
Kathmandhu (Nepal)
1934 earthquake 7
risk category 12
Kawasaki (Japan), risk category 12

Kermanshah (Iran), risk category 12
Killari/Latur earthquake (India, 1993)
360
Kobe (Japan)
1995 earthquake 32n[21], 92n[2],
123n[44], 124n[45]
buildings damaged/destroyed
54n[6]
economic losses due to 67,
346n[34]
injuries/fatalities 119n[36],
281n[19]
risk category 12
Kocaeli earthquake (Turkey, 1999) 7,
28–30
damage to buildings 28–30, 45,
235, 276, 280n[17], 332
repair costs 55
economic losses 53, 67
effect on national economy 48,
65–6
industrial hazards 126n[47]
loss stakeholders 44–53
and neighbouring province 174n[39]
strengthening of buildings 301, 358
land prices, and earthquakes 198
land-use planning
and building stock management 193
in examples of reconstruction 169,
170, 196

limitations 197
and seismic microzoning 194–6,
258
landslides 126–7, 235 –6
factors affecting 236, 343
fatalities due to 8
large ground deformations 234
Lebanon
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Leninakan earthquake (former USSR,
1988) 32n[21], 153
lethal earthquakes
frequency 10
most lethal (listed) 7
lethality ratio 338–9
Libya
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Li
´
ege earthquake (Belgium, 1983) 339
lifting equipment 113, 114
Lima (Peru), risk category 12
412 INDEX
limited-intervention model of
reconstruction 156, 157
liquefaction 234–5
liquids, industrial 188
Lisbon (Portugal) 307

building upgrading strategy
cost-effectiveness 375
criteria affecting choice 307
1755 earthquake 153, 307
listening equipment (during SAR
operations) 111
loans, for rebuilding 161
lobbying (for better protection) 182,
211–12
local currency loss, meaning of term 39
Loma Prieta earthquake (USA, 1989) 60,
67, 124n[45], 339
Long Beach (USA), earthquake mitigation
legislation 379
long-term earthquake prediction 71–4
long-term economic development, effects
on 43
long-term planning, at national level
212–13
long-term protection 226
Los Angeles (USA)
1994 earthquake 67
earthquake mitigation legislation
379
strengthening of buildings 359,
372–3, 380
cost per life saved 372
loss costs
budgeting for 221
estimates over time 38, 40

types 39
loss estimates 144
information needed 313
limit to use 41
users 311, 313
loss estimation 311–13
applications
in rural areas 346–7
in urban areas 347–9
techniques
potential loss studies 312
probabilistic risk analysis 312
scenario studies 311–12
uncertainty in 349–51
see also casualty estimation
loss inventories 143
loss stakeholders 38, 44–54, 68
low-income communities, vulnerability
210, 211
Lucca–Modena (Italy), evacuation 82
Luzon earthquake (Philippines, 1990)
66, 67, 339
M-parameters 339 –41
injury distribution at collapse (M4)
340, 340, 341
mortality post-collapse (M5) 340–1,
340, 341
occupancy at time of earthquake
(M2) 340
occupants trapped by collapse (M3)

339–40, 340, 341
population per building (M1) 340
machinery, protection of 188
magnitude of earthquakes 18
limits 21
measurement of 21
most lethal earthquakes (listed) 7
scales 19, 20
magnitude–recurrence relationships 18,
19, 241, 242–4, 245
loss estimation using 346–7
Malawi, fatalities 6
Managua earthquake (Nicaragua, 1972)
66, 67
Manila (Philippines), risk category 12
Manjil earthquake (Iran, 1990) 7, 67,
160, 339
market approach to earthquake protection
376
market model of reconstruction 157
masonry buildings 280
casualty estimation 339–42
causes of weakness 287, 297
classification of damage (in EMS)
25, 322
collapse of 9, 102, 108
as cause of fatalities 8–9, 340,
340, 341, 342
propping up after 135, 136–7
likely locations for survivors 108

strengthening of 171, 172, 229, 291,
292, 294, 295, 296–9
effect on fatalities 370–1
effect on house losses 347
evaluating of various programmes
369–71
structural types 264
vulnerability functions 329, 330
INDEX 413
see also adobe; brick; concrete block;
dressed stone; rubble stone
masonry
maximum credible earthquake (MCE)
maps 249, 250, 253
mean response spectral acceleration
(MRSA) 331
relationship to PSI scale 331
media coverage, effects 96, 149
medical aspects 117–23
attention at rescue site 114
medical services
calculation of resource needs
118–20
disaster response model 120n[37]
timing of demand for 118, 119
medical supplies 122
medical treatment capacity 121–2
Medvedev Sponhuer Karnik (MSK)
intensity scale 27
example of use 22

Mendoza (Argentina), risk category 12
Mercalli Cancani Seiberg (MCS) intensity
scale 27
Messina earthquake (Italy, 1908) 7
Mexicali (Mexico), risk category 12
mexico
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 13
see also Acapulco; Mexicali
mexico City
1985 earthquake 67, 117n[26],
173–4, 198n[4], 199n[5], 237n[6],
271, 339, 358
1957 earthquake 237n[6]
microzoning map 256
strengthening of buildings 173, 303,
358, 380
cost-effectiveness of targeted
programme 373, 374
urban planning 174, 199n[5],
208n[12]
micro-tremor methods 255
microzonation maps
example 256
uses 193–4, 258–9
microzoning 254–9
and land-use planning 194–6, 258
limitations 196
scenarios for 257, 258
mid-ocean ridges 14, 15

mitigation measures 83
Modified Mercalli (MM) intensity scale
26, 27
moment magnitude 21
moment-resisting frames 273, 274
Mongolia, fatalities 6
Montenegro earthquake (1979) 67
morbidity rate 119
Morocco, fatalities 4, 7
mortality rate 119
mortuaries 116
mountain building belts 14
mudflows 127, 236, 343
multi-disciplinary approach to protection
2
multi-hazard preparedness plans 95–6
multi-storey buildings
escape from 101
evacuation times 81
ground-floor discontinuity 275
natural (oscillation) period 197,
269, 271
resonance effects 197, 237, 270
municipal engineer, role in earthquake
protection 206
Naples (Italy), strengthening of buildings
302
national disaster preparedness plans 212
national risk management 211–23
natural period

of buildings 197, 269, 271
of soils 197, 271
nepal
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Kathmandhu
net
net present cost (NPC) 365n[14]
Netherlands, fatalities 6
networks (services/transport) 204–5
protection strategy 234
new buildings, preventative construction
techniques 288, 289–93, 294, 295,
359–63
New Zealand
casualty distributions for various
building types 342
compulsory insurance 357
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Newcastle earthquake (Australia, 1989)
339
414 INDEX
Nicaragua
economic losses 13, 66, 67
fatalities 4, 13
see also Managua
non-engineered buildings
structural types 264
vulnerability 217

see also rubble stone masonry;
traditional buildings
non-structural hazards 8, 179, 187–9,
277
non-structural losses 345
normal distribution 326n[15]
Northridge earthquake (USA, 1994)
losses due to 40–1, 54n[6], 60, 61,
63
precast concrete structures 280n[17]
repair costs for residential buildings
55
small-business recovery 58
notification of likely earthquake 79–80
Noto earthquake (Sicily, Italy, 1693),
reconstruction after 168–9
nuclear power stations 126, 186–7
observed vulnerability 318
occupant-protected structures 186
organisation
by central authorities in emergency 92
of medical services 122
out-of-plane forces, effects 272–3
Oxfam projects 361, 362
Pakistan
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Quetta
paleoseismology 73
pancake collapse of reinforced concrete

buildings 108, 110
Papayan earthquake (Colombia, 1983)
117n[29]
Papua New Guinea, fatalities 5
parameterless scale of seismic intensity
see PSI scale
participation in earthquake protection
180
passive (energy dissipation) systems
278–9
payback periods for building upgrading
strategies 372, 375
peak ground acceleration (PGA) 267
effect of site conditions 253
peak horizontal ground acceleration
(PHGA) 328
relationship to PSI scale 331
perception of risk 377–8
performance point, defined in HAZUS
334, 335
personal risk management 178–83
Peru
economic losses 13
fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Ancash; Lima; Piura; Trujillo
Philippines
economic losses 13, 66, 67
fatalities 4, 13
relative seismic rates 316
see also Luzon; Manila

physical loss, meaning of term 39
physical reconstruction 150–6
Piura (Peru), risk category 12
plan size (of building), limitation of 275
planning approach to earthquake
protection 376–7
planning system, limitations 197, 355
plate tectonics 14–15, 357
Poisson distribution 349n[39]
Poland, fatalities 6
population growth 11, 383
effect on scale of disasters 2
Portugal
fatalities 5
see also Lisbon
potential loss studies 312
pounding of adjacent buildings 277
power spectrum 268
precursory phenomena, in earthquake
prediction 74–5, 77
predicted vulnerability 318
prediction of earthquakes 16, 71–8
long-term 71–4
practical reaction to 78–83
short-term 74–8
preparedness 71–89
prioritisation of protection 186, 205
private building owners, losses by 54–8
probabilistic risk analysis 312
probabilistic seismic hazard assessment

(PHSA) 73
probability distributions, and vulnerability
assessment 323–4
project supervision, failures in 355–6
INDEX 415
propping up dangerous buildings 135,
136–7
PSI scale 325–33
relationship to other intensity scales
326–31
use in post-earthquake damage
surveys 331–3
public administration offices
emergency function 202–3
role in recovery 202–3
public awareness programmes 87–8,
209, 218–19
public buildings
emergency function 202
role in recovery 202
public confidence
and media coverage 96
re-establishing 134–8
public health 122–3
public information and advice, examples
84–6
public information campaigns 84–9,
219, 230
public sector
budgeting for losses 221

funding of mitigation measures 222
losses by 48, 53, 64–6
Puerto Rico
economic losses 13
fatalities 5, 13
Quetta (masonry) bond 172, 291
Quetta (Pakistan)
building code 172, 355
1935 earthquake 7, 171
reconstruction after 171–2
Quindio earthquake (Colombia, 1999) 67
radar systems, survivor location using
111
radio-based communications systems
96–7, 191
radon monitoring, in prediction technique
77
rail networks
emergency function 204
role in recovery 204
rammed earth buildings 264
improved construction techniques
361, 362
reconnaissance after earthquake
regional 98–100
urban 100–1
reconstruction 141, 150–6
community consultation and
involvement 225
and construction industry 162–5

of damaged settlements 151
of destroyed settlements 151–2
historical examples 167–74
housing and shelter policy 156–62
incremental 161–2
and protection measures 165–75
of towns and cities 152–6
reconstruction master plan 156
recovering from earthquakes 141–76
sectoral plan 142–4
recurrence loss, meaning of term 39
recurrence–magnitude relationships 18,
19, 241, 242–4, 245
recurrence–time analysis 244, 245, 246
see also return periods
Red Cross/Red Crescent 49, 131, 133,
224
redevelopment model of reconstruction
156, 157
refuge areas 81
regional earthquake catalogues 239n[8]
regional reconnaissance 98–100
regional seismicity 238
regulatory measures 68–9
rehabilitation period 141
reinforced concrete buildings 280
casualty estimation 339–42
causes of weakness 299
classification of damage (in EMS)
25, 322

collapse of 102, 108–9
as cause of fatalities 8, 9–10,
340, 340, 341, 342
likely locations for survivors 108–9
strengthening of 299–304
evaluating various strategies
371–3
structural types 264–5
vulnerability functions 329, 330
reinforced masonry buildings 280
construction techniques 171, 172,
291, 292, 294, 295
vulnerability functions 329, 330
reinsurance companies 51, 60
relocation of settlements 153–5, 175
repair cost ratio 314, 320–1
416 INDEX
rescue time, factors affecting 103–4
rescuers, trained 104, 112
residential buildings
core houses 161–2
emergency function 202
insurance 56–7
lifetimes 167, 354
non-structural losses 345
repair costs 55
resources for repair 56
role in recovery 202
resonance effects 197, 270
response spectrum 270–1

in design code 284
effect of soil conditions 254
retail businesses
losses by 143
recovery of 147–8
return periods
and long-term prediction 73
and reconstruction decisions 166–7
Richter (magnitude) scale 19, 20
ringbeams 172, 291, 308, 361
costs 292, 347
effect on fatalities 370
effect on house losses 347
effect on vulnerability 329, 330
risk
mathematical definition 317
meaning of term 313–14
risk management
corporate 183–92
national 211–23
people involved in 2–3
personal 178–83
urban 192–211
risk mitigation in action 353–84
risk modelling 311–52
risk perception 377–8
risk transfer 68
alternative 63–4
see also insurance
risk zonation mapping 257–8

road networks
emergency function 204
role in recovery 204
rockfalls 127, 236
Romania
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 5, 13
see also Bucharest
roof stiffening 290–1
costs 292
effects 273
Rossi–Forel (R-F) intensity scale 27
rubber springs 278
rubble clearance 134–5
rubble stone masonry 264, 280
defects 287
low-/no-cost improvement
modifications 288, 289–91, 292
vulnerability 9, 266, 286
vulnerability functions 329, 330
rural areas
loss estimation in 346–7
upgrading of buildings 359–63
evaluation of programmes
369–71
Russia, fatalities 5
safety culture 87, 88–9, 178, 382
safety of home 178–9
San Fernando earthquake (USA, 1971)
117n[26]

San Francisco (USA)
1906 earthquake 37–8, 124,
125n[46]
risk category 12
risk zonation mapping 257–8
San Jose (USA), risk category 12
San Juan (Argentina), risk category 12
San Salvador
1986 earthquake 67, 127, 236n[2]
risk category 12
Sanitary Revolution 380–1
compared with earthquake protection
381–3
sanitation, in temporary/field camps 134
Sapporo (Japan), microzonation map 257
scenario studies 311–12
scenario zoning 257, 258
search-and-rescue (SAR) 101 –6
dealing with dead after 116
ending the search 115–16
international SAR teams 104–6
strategy 107
strengthening local SAR capability
106
techniques 106–17
tools and equipment required
112–14
sectoral recovery plans 142–4
coordination of 142
seiches 236, 344

INDEX 417
seismic design codes
education/training about 214–15,
216
see also building codes
seismic gap theory 16, 74
seismic hazard maps
global map, 14, Plate I 249
procedures 238–48
attenuation relationships 246–8
catalogue compilation 238–42
computational procedure 248
magnitude–recurrence
relationships 241, 242–4, 245
synthesis from several data sources
248
US Geological Survey maps 248–9
seismic hazards
assessment of 73, 238–53
effect of site conditions 253 –4
seismic intensity scales 22–6
historical development of 27
seismic microzoning maps 193–4
seismic moment 21
seismic profiling 72n[1]
seismic source zones 240, 242
example 243
magnitude–recurrence relationships
242, 243
seismic vulnerability mapping 193–4

seismic waves 17
seismological network 219–20
seismometers, information from 97
self-protection measures 31–3
semi-market approach to earthquake
protection 376
Sendai (Japan), risk category 12
separation between buildings 277
September 11 (2001) attacks 44n[4]
service industries
losses by 143
recovery of 148
severity of earthquakes 3, 7, 18
most lethal earthquakes (listed) 7
sewage disposal
business use 190
and field camps 134
shanty towns see informal settlements
Shanxi earthquake (China, 1999) 54n[6]
shared interest 68, 69
shear coefficient
determination of 283
illustrative example in design code
216
shear walls 273, 274, 300, 301
shelter 128–34
improvisation for first few days
129, 157, 158
Shiraz (Iran), risk category 12
shock loss, meaning of term 39

shoring up of dangerous buildings 112,
113, 135, 136
short-term prediction 74–8
site assessment, factors affecting 233
site-related earthquake hazards 234–7
ground shaking amplification 195,
237
landslides 235–6
large ground deformations 234
soil liquefaction 234–5
tsunamis and floods 236
site selection 154, 233–4
site-specific hazard 238
Skopje earthquake (Yugoslavia, 1963)
153
slenderness (of building), limitation of
275
slope failures 127, 236
small and medium businesses
losses by 46, 53, 58
recovery of 147–8
soil conditions
and acceleration spectrum 254
and damage distributions 348
soils
frequency characteristics 197
liquefaction of 234–5, 343
Solomon Islands, fatalities 5
South Africa, fatalities 5
Spain, fatalities 6

specific risk, meaning of term 314
spinal injuries 117
spreading zones 15
squatter settlements 125, 200, 211
stakeholders, losses by 38, 44–54, 68
standby generators 190
steel frame buildings, structural types
265
stock markets, effects on 44, 52, 53
storm 90A (Northern Europe, 1990) 63
strain energy build-up and release 244,
350
418 INDEX
street safety
after earthquake 135–7
in urban planning 205
stress drop, as prediction indicator 75
stretchers (to move injured survivors)
114
strong motion records 267, 268
structural engineers 112
structural materials 279–81
structural safety of buildings 178–9,
183–5
after earthquake 112, 135–6
structural strengthening of buildings 179,
184, 293–304
costs 209, 292, 347
effect on fatalities 370–1
effect on house losses 347

evaluation of targeted programmes
373, 374
subduction zones 15
subsoil modelling, and microzoning
256–7
Sudan, fatalities 6
suffocation 117
fade-away times for trapped victims
103
super-catastrophes 63
super-cities 383
surface faulting 16
surface (seismic) waves 17
survival times of trapped victims 101–3
survivors
acoustics of victim audibility in
rescue 110–11, 110
fade-away times 102, 103
finding 109–12
likely locations 108–9
transportation of injured 115
Tabas earthquake (Iran, 1978) 7
Taiwan
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 13
see also Chichi
Tajikistan earthquake (former USSR,
1907) 7
Tangshan earthquake (China, 1976) 7,
32n[21], 67, 153n[13], 200, 298

Tanzania, fatalities 6
tectonic earthquakes 14–15, 16, 17
Tehran (Iran), risk category 12
telephone systems 96, 190, 201, 204
temporary evacuation 129–30
temporary housing 157, 158–60
temporary relief camps
location 129, 134, 158
and public health 123
sanitation in 134
water requirements 133
tents 130–3
heaters for 132
thermal imaging cameras 111
through stones 289
Tianjin (China), risk category 12
tie rods 307, 308
timber frame buildings 280–1
casualty estimation 339, 342
fatalities due to collapse 8, 340, 342
fire risk 124
structural types 264
vulnerability functions 329
time sequence analysis 244, 245, 246
Tokyo (Japan), risk category 12
tourism and leisure
losses by 143
recovery of 149
traditional buildings
defects 287

low-cost preventative measures 288,
289
cost-effectiveness 370
fatalities reduced by 370
vulnerability 217, 266
traditional construction techniques 217
improvements 286–92, 360–3
improving earthquake resistance
285–9
by low-cost modifications 288,
289–91, 292
by removing defects 286, 287,
289
educational material for 293,
294, 295
and self-protection measures 31–2
training
of builders 228–30, 293, 294–5,
360–1, 363
of employees 189–90
of engineers 214–15, 218
transportation
for business 191
of injured survivors 115
triage 120–1
TRINET system 97n[6]
INDEX 419
Trujillo (Peru), risk category 12
Tsinghai earthquake (China, 1927) 7
tsunamis 127–8, 236, 344

Tunisia, fatalities 6
turkey
compulsory earthquake insurance
215, 261
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
recurrence–time plot 245
seismic zoning map 251, 252
see also Bing
¨
ol; Bolu; Bursa;
Erzincan; Erzurum; Istanbul;
Izmir; Izmit; Kocaeli
Turkmenistan, fatalities 5
Typhoon Mireille (Japan, 1991) 63
Uganda, fatalities 5
UK, relative seismic rates 316
Umbria–Marche earthquake (Italy, 1997)
138n[52], 149n[6], 297, 305, 305,
306, 308
United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees (UNHCR) 49, 131
United Nations Office of the Co-ordinator
of Disaster Relief (UNDRO), agreed
definitions 313n[2], 314n[3]
urban areas, loss estimation in 347–9
urban buildings
strengthening of 299–304
evaluating various strategies
371–3

urban deconcentration 175, 198–200
urban facilities
decentralising 201, 204–5
emergency function 204
protecting 201
role in recovery 204
urban parks 199
urban planning 192–205
urban population densities
limiting in new settlements
199–200
reducing 198–9
urban reconnaissance 100–1
urban reconstruction 152–6
urban (re)design 153, 167, 168, 170
urban risk 11, 12
urban risk management 192–211
urbanisation, and seismic risk 383
US Geological Survey (USGS), national
seismic hazard maps 248–9
USA
death risk probability 368, 369
demographic growth in
earthquake-prone regions 62
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 5, 13
relative seismic rates 316
see also Alaska; Boston; Loma
Prieta; Long Beach; Los Angeles;
Northridge; San Fernando; San

Francisco; San Jose
USSR (former)
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 4, 7, 13
see also Armenia; Ashkhabad;
Chernobyl; Leninakan; Tajikistan
utilities and services
decentralisation of 201, 204–5
emergency function 204
losses 143
reconstruction of 153
role in recovery 204
self-sufficiency 190
vaccination programmes 123
Valparaiso (Chile), risk category 12
value-adjusted losses 37–8, 39
Vanuatu, fatalities 6
Venezuela
fatalities 4
see also Caracas
vernacular house 217
vibration mountings for machinery 188
visual probes, survivor location using
111
volunteer groups, in emergency operations
92, 104, 121
vulnerability
countries compared 11, 13–14
meaning of term 315–17
and protection 33–4

vulnerability assessment 317–25
building type and facility type
classification 318–19
damage distribution 322–3
damage evaluation 319–22
expert opinion survey 325
general approach 317–18
probability distributions 323–4
secondary factors 320
uncertainties in 350–1
vulnerability classes (in EMS) 26
420 INDEX
vulnerability index 351n[42]
vulnerability mapping/zoning 193–4,
348
vulnerable old buildings 210–11
warehouse storage racks 187
warning systems 78, 80, 128
water requirements 133
water systems
in businesses 190
emergency function 125, 204
restoration after earthquake 133
role in recovery 204
water-table monitoring, in prediction
technique 76–7
weakest buildings, targeting for
upgrading/rebuilding 209–10
weatherproofing of damaged buildings
137

workplace safety 179–80
World Food Program 49
World Health Organization (WHO),
guidelines on water requirements
133
world population growth 11, 383
and urbanisation 383
World Trade Center attack 44n[4]
World Wide Standard Seismograph
Network 239, 357
Xi’an (China), risk category 12
Yemen
fatalities 5
rural building education project
229, 361, 363
see also Dhamar
Yokohama (Japan), risk category 12
Yugoslavia
economic losses 13, 67
fatalities 5, 13
see also Skopje
Yunnan earthquake (China, 1970) 7
Zaire, fatalities 6
Plate IMEarthquakes across the world. Global distribution of seismic hazard as designed by GSHAP
. The map shows the peak horizontal gro
und
acceleration with a 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years (Source: GSHAP
, />Plate IIMSeismic hazard map of the European area derived from the GSHAP (Grünthal,
1999). The map shows the peak horizontal ground acceleration (m/sec
2

)with a 10%
probability of being exceeded in 50 years (Source: GSHAP, />Plate IIIMInsurance risk mapping: annualised earthquake damage ratio for Turkey shown
at province level (from Bommer et al. 2002; copyright Cordis Consulting Ltd.)